BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 09:16 PM

You ain't suggestin' that these guys make the facists look liike Boy Scouts, is you, McG? If so, count me in...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 09:05 PM

I'm not worried about calling them Fascists because it upsets them, but because they are sufficiently different that it doesn't stick. It helps them get away with murder.

When it comes to having total control and surveillance over all that happens, at an individual level, the Fascists just weren't in the same league. And they controlled relatively weak and small countries, which could dream of dominating a continent. The USA holds the whole world in its hands.

And when it comes to a willingness to be ruthless, and willing to override any kind of restrictions, when it sees that as necessary, the US Government and its agencies have no lessons to learn from anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 05:23 PM

Ebbie,

And as for positives, the KDF-wagen (Volkswagen). It was to be produced by the "masses" and were to be purchased over time as folks made payments into their KDF books. Please don't ask me what the KDF stands for but the English translation is something along the lines of "Peace Thru Joy"..

BTW, no cars were ever actually produced for the masses but I don't doubt that Hitler wanted to see one in everyone's driveway. Well, everyone who was in with in the in crowd. It was the English who occupied Wolfsburg who made the greatest strides in making VeeDubs what they would later become: mass produced great little cars.

McG:

I very seldomly find myself disagreeing with you but progressives have been shy about standing up when it counts and have been *out-frames* on issue after issue, choosing to counterpunch rather than taking on the right in a frontal manner. And look where it has gotten us... It's way past time to put the right wing on the defensive and get the masses thinking in a space defined by progressives...

Jus' my opinion, my frined. I don't spend no time worrying about you havin' my back 'cause I know yer heart...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 04:39 PM

Whatever song we are making, we use the same notes, and they are beautiful notes. A speech by Martin Luther King or Adolf Hitler will be written using the same letters, and a calligrapher can make them both look equally beautiful.

If you can focus people's attention on the little details, and on a blurry distant vision, with luck they will never pay attention to what is actually going on around them.

..................

But I still think "fascist" is a word that points us in the wrong direction, and disguises the real danger we face. This isn't measles, it's something else; it could still kill, but it won't do it quite the same way. No good crying "wolf" when the threat is from armed men.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 04:21 PM

Good point, LH.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 04:13 PM

Ebbie - You wrote: "It feels strange to think and post what amounts to positive thoughts about Nazism when it really had no redeeming qualities."

To the contrary, I suspect it had many redeeming qualities...they were just badly outweighed by its very destructive qualities, that's all, and that became evident in the end toward all but the most hardcore supporters of the Third Reich.

It wouldn't be easy to find a social system or philosophy with NO redeeming qualities, as such a system would probably not attract enough adherents to establish itself in the first place.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 03:34 PM

I read somewhere that Hitler was more of a Big Brother than a
parental figure to the German people. They were rebelling
against the stringest parental restrictions in German society.
It was more of a gang thing. Rebel against your parents and play
follow the fuhrer.

Don't think America is facist yet but I will advocate that
it was started by a group of liberals. Jefferson, Paine, Franklyn,
and those Abolitionists as well as Quakers. Not too much mentioned about the Masons, but they were around too. Even those Puritans
had a liberal streak. They started public education.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 03:23 PM

Amos, I consider it your right to get steamed up. Glad you have
some passion.   It's great to see.

I'd hate it if everyone thought alike. That's one of
the things I like here. We can all have different views and
share them.   If we get steamed up once in a while, I think
that's all to the good.

I read posts by Teribus and Doug very carefully and take in
what they have to say. I don't have to agree but I really
respect their right to their views and to express them. I believe they articulate them clearly so we can have a discussion.

The last two words any American or anyone else in the world
needs to have in his/her vocabulary is "shut up". To do that is Unamerican, in my book.

Frank

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 03:14 PM

Sure, Ebbie, Hitler spoke of the importance of the common man. He had to because he needed them to get with the program and yo do some rather brutal things. This was part of the plan. Make the working guy think you're out there working for him. Bush does the same thing. But the operative word here is "make the working guy think." (Nos. 1 and 5 in obove post.)

Just as Hitler did in buddying up with the industrialists (management) Bush has buddied up with the corporations (management). (No. 9 in my above post.)

Might of fact, Ebbie. You might want to reread the 10 elements of fascism that Russ Bellant obsevres in his book and see how many of them apply to the current situation in our country.

Like I've said before, the term fascism shouldn't be a term that is kept off the table. When we demonize words we limit ourselves in our thinking and our discussions. The conservatives demonized the word "liberal" for a couple of decades and it is just recently that some progressives feel comfortable in describing themselves as liberals. What is further interesting is that it wasn't the liberals who demonized the word fascism but the conservatives. Hmmmmmm? They just don't want it used on them the way the beat pregressives with the "liberal" stick.

Well, tough. They can't have it both ways...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 01:26 PM

Colin, the Duck! Works for me.

Little Hawk, a German told me that one of the attractions of the Nazi regime was the lowering of the bar between management and labo(u)r. He said that after Hitler came to power the bosses were encouraged to come to the pubs and sit and drink with the men in conviviality, and that this *never* happened before. Germany had been very class conscious, he said, and Hitler very positively affected that. I have not read that anywhere, but that evidently was the perception of the Germans themselves.

It feels strange to think and post what amounts to positive thoughts about Nazism when it really had no redeeming qualities. What I'm trying to do here, as I said, is to look at it from the point of view of those who felt they benefitted from it.

I'm trying to understand my own country...

Subject: RE: BS:Lyr Add - Young Colin
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 01:14 PM

"if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck..."

Unless it isn't. As in this monologue I once wrote (well, it's an excuse to post it):

Young Colin, he worked for the Council,
he used to give people advice.
It was difficult stuff, and at time he felt rough,
like his head had been trapped in a vice.
And he felt like a fish out of water,
or a fork that was short of a knife.
Like some wall that's been built without mortar,
there was something mislaid in his life.

At one time he tried country dancing.
He tried helping out with the scouts.
He even got dressed as a woman, no less -
but that never really worked out.
For Colin was blessed with a big bushy beard,
and somehow it never felt right
when he'd go along shoppin', down at the Coop, in
a skirt and stilettoes and tights.

And at night in the pub he felt silly -
well you feel just a little bit strange
when you reach with your hand for your wallet,
and you're stuck with a handful of change.
So in the end Colin decided
he wasn't cut out for a dress.
He told them he'd blundered,
and his cash was refunded -
which was ever so kind of the shop.

It was a kind hearted mate
proved his angel of fate
when he said, "Now this could be a lark.
It seems there's a fun run next Sunday, old son.
It's to buy back the privatised park.
The runners go three times round gasworks,
and everyone's back home for tea.
Are you on for a fiver, Young Colin?"
And Colin said "That'll do me."

Well the rules they were really quite simple
for this Charity fund-raising hike.
You could come as you happened to fancy,
and you could fancy whatever you liked.
So you might choose to report
in your singlet and shorts,
or astride a Victorian Bike.
Or then again, maybe,
you might come as a baby,
or come out, as a miner on strike.

Young Colin thought hard to determine
just what it was he ought to wear.
Should he run as the Lord Mayor, in ermine?
Could he bear to be some kind of bear?
Should he hit the old trail as a cow-poke?
Maybe turn up as Old Friar Tuck?
Then a light from on high, like a vision -
"I reckon I'll go as a duck"

Now as soon as he got in his costume,
he felt like a bug in a rug
in a pair of webbed feet and a duck-bill,
and a suit of warm feathers so snug.
"I always thought ducks looked so happy"
said Colin, "well now I know why.
I reckon, I've found what was missing.
Oh I wish I was able to fly."

So after the fun-run was done with,
Young Colin held on to his duck,
And he started to wear it, in private -
any time he felt down on his luck.
And after a while he grew bolder -
well, there's no use in messing about,
You can't keep a duck in a closet.
So he opened the door, and come out.

It was lucky he worked for a Council
committed to not being unfair.
They hadn't come up against ducks, up to then -
But "The principle's perfectly clear!"
There were one or two anti-duck bigots,
But there wasn't a lot they could do -
For if Colin preferred
to come dressed as a Bird,
"That's already covered by Rule forty-two"

So if you've a problem, that plagues you,
Such as, what is your correct Council Tax,
They've a helpful official - he'll aid you.
Just don't be surprised when he quacks.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 10:17 AM

Ebbie,

In addition to what has been posted, according to Russ Bellant, who has exhuastively researched fascism, the Nazi Party and is author of "Old Nazis, the New Right and the Republican Party", fascism is built around the following:

1. Nationalism and superpatriotism with a snese of historic mission.

2. Agreesive militarism.

3. Use of violence or threats of violence to impose views on others.

4. Authoritarian reliance on a leader.

5. "Cult" of personality around a "charismatic leader".

6. Reaction against the values of "Modernism", usually with emotional attacks against both liberism and communism.

7. Dehumanizing and scapegoating of the enemy- seeing the enemy as an inferior or subhuman force, "perhaps involved in a conspiracy that justifies eradicating them".

8. The self-image of being the superior form of social organization.

9. Forging of an alliance with an elite sector.

10. Abanodonment of any consistenet ideology in a drive for state power.

"Fascism, which was not afraid to call itself reactionary... does not hesitate to call itself illiberal and anti-liberal"..... Benito Mussolini......

"Reactionary concepts plus revolutionary emotion result in Fascist mentality"..... Wilhelm Reich

"The masses of people... will more easily fall vistims to a big lie than to smaller ones"..... Adolf Hitler

and lastly, "If fascism came to America, it would be on a program of Amercanism".... Huey. P. Long

Like I've been saying for a long time, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck...

Hope this helps, Ebbie...

Bobert (resident commie)

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 04:46 AM

They Were Only Children

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Jan 04 - 04:39 AM

Another is the idea of all of "us" together, proud and undefiant. And free from the contamination of those among "us" who aren't part of "us". "Tomorrow belongs to us".

No comment......

There were fascists states long before there were books on 'How To Create a Fascist State. We know only too well how to create theses States - in the USA or indeed anywhere else without needing definitions of the word or a model to follow. It is rather simple.

It is just necessary for good folk to do nothing.

These States are created not out of any conscious ideology but because people who want power find ways of disposing of any potential rivals and ways of gettig rid of the freedom of anyone to speak against them. It is a gradual process which is hardly noticable and indeed many people do nothing to stop it - and many actively support and encourage this process - until it is too late.

Maybe a better title for this thread may be - Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet - while we can still have fun?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 10:34 PM

Okay, Ebbie, let me put myself in the mindset of an avid supporter of Naziism in, say, late 1940...

"Our country (Germany) was in terrible shape before Hitler took power. The economy was in a shambles. A few rich scoundrels were profiteering off the misery of millions. Large parts of our territory had been taken from us after WWI by the treacherous Allies who decided to unfairly blame us for the whole Great War and rob us of territory and disband our armed forces, turning us into a very weakened nation. Parts of the country were taken and incorporated into the new nation of Poland, a nation which had not even existed since rather ancient times. Other parts were occupied by France, a country which had not defeated us on the battlefield, but been driven back by our forces. Our currency was almost worthless. Unemployment and hardship were commonplace.

The Nazis gave us back our pride in ourselves. They gave us hope for the future. They restored the pride and effectiveness of our armed forces and built a new army and air force second to none in the world, while the new navy, though smaller, was first rate in quality. They restored an effective economy and put people back to work again. They built magnificent new roads and buildings. They shut down the anarchists, traitors, and communists who intended to tear apart our society.

They brought stability, order, and prosperity to a desperate nation, and made it a world power again.

The Fuhrer succeeded in gaining back the lands which had been stolen from Germany after the Great War...first by clever negotiation coupled with bold action (Rhineland, Austria, Sudetenland)...then when all else failed, by military action (Poland).

The Poles attacked us first anyway, and they got what they deserved!

Britain and France then declared war on us with no justification whatsover, and THEY are to blame for the conflict which followed. Germany was only defending herself. We had to go into Norway in 1940 to prevent a British invasion. The exigencies of war also obliged us to occupy the Low Countries, but this would never have had to occur if the British and French had seen fit to leave us alone and not launch an aggressive war against us.

For their criminal pride the French paid dearly, as we quickly defeated them. The British are a tougher nut to crack, but they will surely see reason and negotiate and end this pointless conflict, which they started, not Germany. The real danger to all of Europe is Communist Russia and the English must be made to see that. It is inevitable that Germany will lead the West in a final battle to destroy the Soviet Union, and it is logical that England should be our ally. Only that blockhead Churchill stands in the way, and the English people will soon realize this and throw him out."

And so on...and so on... * * * Hasty readers be aware...the above thoughts are NOT mine, they are an example of how a Nazi supporter might have thought in 1940! * * *

I believe the above is a pretty good representation of the mindset of many Nazi supporters in 1940. I left out specific references to the Jews, because many people are simply too traumatized around that issue already, and I don't want to add to their distress.

Given the benefit of hindsight this self-serving propaganda doesn't sound so good...but if any of us had been Germans living there at that time we might well have believed most or all of it.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 10:13 PM

what that original article was asking was for us to look at our own government and compare.

sometimes a definition is so disturbing it becomes toxic. we need to cling on to the good things, to remind ourselves we don't live in Guinea or somewhere.

yes, fascism is a horrible term, and has been thrown around recklessly.

yes, we have all sorts of checks and balances (the courts, in our country).

but in Australia the government is working relentlessly to limit the power of the courts over government decisions.

pickled old crone
(bitter & twisted)

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 09:42 PM

"The compelling virtue of fascism is that it imposes order, which in the face of trying times can be incredibly attractive." The loss of that imposed order with its attendant safety and full employment probably accounts for some Europeans' dismay and discontent since their country went 'democratic'. I'm thinking specifically of Poland. They're having a hard time, judging by my friends' reactions.

I had read the 'official' definition and description of fascism. What I was looking for, Amos, was the view as seen by the believers. Even Nazism had its rah rah section.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 07:44 PM

NOUN:
1. often Fascism a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

ETYMOLOGY:
Italian fascismo, from fascio, group, from Late Latin fascium, from Latin fascis, bundle.

OTHER FORMS:
fas·cistic (f-shstk) —ADJECTIVE

WORD HISTORY:
It is fitting that the name of an authoritarian political movement like Fascism, founded in 1919 by Benito Mussolini, should come from the name of a symbol of authority. The Italian name of the movement, fascismo, is derived from fascio, "bundle, (political) group," but also refers to the movement's emblem, the fasces, a bundle of rods bound around a projecting axe-head that was carried before an ancient Roman magistrate by an attendant as a symbol of authority and power. The name of Mussolini's group of revolutionaries was soon used for similar nationalistic movements in other countries that sought to gain power through violence and ruthlessness, such as National Socialism.   

(From the American Heritage).

The compelling virtue of fascism is that it imposes order, which in the face of trying times can be incredibly attractive.

Amos

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 07:31 PM

Sounds very much like some churches I have known! And I have known people who are more comfortable having the church make the hard decisions for them.

What does the word itself, "fascism", mean? I imagine it is Italian? Did Mussolini, for instance, use the term and mean it to be a strong, confident, wholesome word?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 07:21 PM

I meant "defiant" (my subconscious was probably jumping forward to "undefiled")

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 07:02 PM

"undefiant"?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 06:55 PM

Maybe rather than "What are the good points" the better question would be, "What are the points that people have found attractive about it?"

We've already had one of those - the uniforms. Or rather, the drama and spectacle. The kind of thing that people enjoy in a lot of Hollywood movies.

Another is the idea of a strong and decisive leadership, taking decisions that sort out all the complicated problems, doing what needs to be done. "Triumph of the Will."

Another is the idea of all of "us" together, proud and undefiant. And free from the contamination of those among "us" who aren't part of "us". "Tomorrow belongs to us".

And another is the appeal of getting in touch with our roots, where we came from. Escaping from the chains of rationality and logic and compromise.

Put it in those kinds of terms and it's not hard to see how a very seductive package can be put together, using elements which in other circumstances and other hands could make something completely different.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 06:30 PM

Well, an adherent to fascism would list all the good points of it, Ebbie, as he/she saw them. How do we find such a person?

I know! Just look up the "Project For The New Century" or some other policy paper from the neoconservative think tanks. Bobert can tell you where to find it.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 02:21 PM

I would like to read a summary of a manifesto for fascism, in other words, something written from the perspective of an adherent, a believer, for comparison with today's fears. Would someone articulate, sensitive and skilled please write it and post it here? I don't mean pasting it from an official diatribe from long ago. Little Hawk? Anyone?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 01:31 PM

I'm with Frank here.
I think the words 'authoritarian' covers a lot, Little Hawk, and 'fascist' should better not be used as a synonyme.

There must be some room left for verbal 'armament' if the times get tougher. A too early use of words like 'fascism' devaluates such words.

'Fascist tendencies' I have less problems with. However, I have a lot of problems with using the word 'fascist' for the communist regimes. That maybe comes from decades in which 'redfascists' (Rotfaschisten) was used in Germany only be the very conservatives as a word to denounce anyone from the left.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 01:27 PM

I think it's a serious mistake to throw the word "fascist" around loosely, and seek to ap-ly it to all authoritarian and totalitarian regimes. It's like using the term "Measles" to refer to a whole range of diseases that give you a rash - Chickenpox, German Measles, Smallpox...

Yes they do have some symptoms in common, and they can all kill you. But lumping them all together as one illness would not be helpful when it came to treating the conditions, or avoiding infection, which is what matters.

The checklist that was posted to start this thread is interesting, but, as Wolfgang said, it read as if it had been written backwards. Start with the result you want and work backwards - we've all done it when we were doing homework, and often enough in adult life.

As Wolfgang pointed out, there were many major elements in Nazism - and in Fascism - which don't carry over to societies such as the present USA. (Though sometimes cultural equivalents can turn up in strange ways - the Nazi culling of people with disabilities was, at least in theory, in line with much "progressive" thought of the time, and echoed the eugenic ideology that was widely practiced elsewhere; and in modern times it is echoed chillingly in attitudes towards foetuses with even minimum disabilities.)

The core of the fascist regimes was a belief that people in power had the right to control every aspect of human life - that is what totalitarian means. In the circumstances of the time it was only possible to achieve that to a very limited extent, and only by the use of very clumsy methods. And there were particular priorities that they focused upon. (For example, "expansionism" was relevant for Germany and Italy in a way that it isn't for the USA - the USA did its expansionism across a whole continent a century and a half ago.)

But if we focus on the methods we are in danger of missing the real danger. These days it doesn't have to be done that way. No need for a network of informers - credit cards and storecards make it easy to keep us all under surveillance. No need for police in every corner to see what we are up to, we have Security TV cameras doing the job..

We live today in what are potentially the most totalitarian societies the world have ever known. We are dependant on the whim of our rulers for our ability to live freely.

Calling it "fascist" misses the point, and plays down the real danger. Yes, they were more brutal than the people who hold us in their power today, but in the end, they were amateurs.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 12:32 PM

Wolfgang - I don't equate the term "fascism" with Naziism. Naziism was one particular form of fascism, that's all. It was under Mussolini that the term "fascist" arose, wasn't it? I think the original article is very good in setting out a number of common features of fascist systems, but you are quite correct that the Nazi experiment differed in some areas from the examples given in the article.

By the way, I also consider the more extreme forms of Communism to be "fascist" (as I define the term)...and they too differ in a number of areas.

The thing to watch for in all these systems is denial of human rights, the glorification of police and security forces, the glorification of the military, the expansion of oppressive government powers into ordinary life, the abrogation of normal legal protections as a supposed "security" measure, the justification of aggression as supposed "self-defence", and so on. It's a big subject.

I tend to see any authoritarian and aggressive system as "fascist", but that's just how I use the term (Communists included! And that's funny, because they claim to be the great anti-fascists of all time.)

It's simple. On one side of the human psyche you have the tendency toward freedom of expression and thought ("liberalism" in the old sense of the term)...and that arises out of a general lack of fear and an enthusiastic curiosity about the possibilities in life. It also indicates a belief in the goodness of human nature. That's the Light side.

On the other side you have the tendency to clamp down, increase authority, limit freedom of expression and thought...and that arises out of FEAR and an enthusiastic desire to control the status quo absolutely and prevent change (unless the change comes from the "Leader" at the very top of the pecking order). That is the Dark side...and from there proceeds the fascist mentality.

So, according to my definition of "fascism" most traditional religions also tend to be fascist at times. In fact, it is almost the rule with religions rather than the exception. (there are a few exceptions here and there)

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 12:31 PM

Frank:

A voice of clear reason, as usual. Thanks. I get a little steamed once in a while and loose my perspective; please forgive.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 12:06 PM

I think we need to talk about facist tendencies rather than use the term to cover every aspect of the political system in the US. We are not a facist nation as of yet because we still have checks and balances.   There are unquestionably in my mind facistic tendencies at work such as the Ashcroft "disappeared" in Guantanamo. The alarming connection to separate church and state through "faith based iniatives" might be construed this way. The jingoism is rampant and some of the other points could loosely be applied but we still have social security, political opposition to the current administration which is not totally being squelched by the media, no real book or magazine burning, no pressure toward accepting a fuhrer Bush, (even some of his supporters are openly critical of some of his policies such as an expensive space program), no conscripted military, a disenfranchised electorate that has not been herded into concentration camps, and other glaring examples as to how we are still a free and vibrant country. This might change but it hasnt happened yet. OHOH it could go the other way more toward democratic ideals and less hegemonic policies abroad.

I don't think that Bush is doing a good job for America but he's not Hitler. That comparison doesn't seem fair to me. He seeks what every American president seeks, power.

I accept that as an American, I have the right to disagree with him and those who support him have the same right to disagree with me. I don't see that as facism but one of the elements of this country that I love.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 11:38 AM

Same here.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 11:06 AM

good ques, carolec

we have a constitution, but no bill of rights

fred

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 09:48 AM

Here's a link to the site where the above article has been copied from.

If you click on the link for 'free inquiry' you will find out from which camp the article comes from. I must say I am very pleased that an article from the skeptical movement gets such a positive mention here. But why this article of all the good ones in that magazine?

As for the list Britt has written down I have the impression that it has been written down with an eye to the result. He has left out or smoothed what didn't fit into the picture he wants his readers to get.

So let me add some critique from a German perspective. He has made some good points, but I don't agree with a lot of details and omissions.

(1) What he has left out completely is the feeling in that time that the own nation has not the correct place in the community of nations it should have. The fascist states tried to climb a bit on the ladder of nations to undo (real or imagined) past wrongs. (Wouldn't really fit the USA; they seem to be quite pleased with their present position in the world).

(2) What he leaves out completely too is (at least for Italy and Germany) the wish for a larger country including Italiens/Germans presently (at that time) living under foreign rule ('Heim in's Reich', bring them home to our country). I see no parallel at all with the USA. And that was one of the most dangerous aspects of fascism for the international peace in Europe.

(3) Religion: The Nazis had quite a contempt (most of them) for the traditional religion. They didn't dare to confront organised religion directly (made compromises), but many of them are on record saying that after the war they will have to deal with the Christian churches. Not a convincing parallel with the USA of today. I know that local leaders in the Nazi movement were under some pressure from above to actually leave the churches.

(4) Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. I do not see here a good understanding of the role of physical labour in Nazi Germany. The Nazis have introduced First of May as Labour day in Germany, contempt for being poor was unknown. At least officially, the work with the hands was seen as superior to other work and there was (that was the angle against the Jews and their 'financial might') open contempt for wealth coming from other sources than work, especially when wealth came from what the Americans now term 'making money'.

(5) Anti-Abortion??? Yes, when it was a healthy child from German parents. Not at all, when the child was not healthy according to their racist ideas or a child from 'lesser' races.

(6) He doesn't mention the euthanasia program of the mentally ill? Why not? Because it has no parallel in the USA?

There are several more points that do not fit well. I have only selected the most obvious to me. Other points do fit. But my overall impression is that there was a preconceived theory in search of corroborating data at the onset of his article.

He has made some good points but has failed to convince me that there is more to it than (in his words) 'verbal gymnastics'.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 09:47 AM

Well, McG, and others. I agree that "Fascism" isn't a term that should be used "loosely". But if the shoe fits, waer it.

Yeah, the word and concepts have been demonize since WWII and so intertwined with Hitler and the Nazi Party that folks seem not to be able to seperate the two. Well, it's time to do just that because it is word that conveys so much of what is going down in the world these days.

I know that most conservatives don't think of themseves as fasists because, well, they don't advocate 'rounding up a bunch of people gasing them. But if these folks would just study the fasicts movement in the 30's they would find a lot of parallels.

I would certainly have more respect for my consertvative friends here if they would do just taht and say, "Yeah, I'm a fascist, but I ain't into killin' no one." That would at least be honest. But to just say that the term "facism" is not on the table because it had negative connotations is no more fair than what the conservatives have done to the word "liberal". Come on, can't have it both ways...

Seems like where-ever one looks the hypocrisy on the right is so evident.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: CarolC
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 09:26 AM

Do you have a constitution of any sort in Australia, GUEST,big brother is reading?

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST,big brother is reading
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 08:11 AM

well said mcg of H.

The level of scrutiny in the Western country I live in (Oz) is very high. We have more people phone tapped per head of population than the US does. As you commented, computer and other technology means that it is now possible for security monitoring organisations to monitor and gather information on people in a way that is unprecedented, except in sci fi books.

These security gathering organisations rely on their interpretation of information from a range of sources. Comment, rumour, innuendo falls into this category. People being investigated are in the dark about who knows what about them, and how reliable that info is. These organisations are not accountable, and can make decisions outside the scrutiny of the courts.

In my government workplace, occasionally people are tapped on the shoulder and silently escorted out. Union delegates are investigated and targeted. When the current government first came in, a letter was sent to managers in Federal govt departments instructing them on the use of weapons such as slander, mocking comments, deriding people to influence the views in the workplace and to bring people in to line. That letter was leaked to the press, but the techniques were used and the workplace has been subdued.

Another concern these days is, who exactly is the government and who do they represent. Where one smaller govt becomes reliant and beholden to another government, who really is in charge of the smaller country?

where the government needs the support of big business, including the media and global organisations, government officials become lackeys of global forces. Does anyone think that governments have the power to govern independently any more?

With security organisations amassing such huge networks of power, and operating outside of normal government accountability checks (such as the courts)there are several concerns:

who do these organisations work for? are they aligned with particular parties? usually spooks are chosen from military and conservative backgrounds. Do they always pass information on to the government muinisters who need it? Do they assist conservative parties in their goals to maintain power?

do they have their own agendas?

the whole notion of democracy has been transformed by business to mean - government for megacorporations, but not for anyone else.

People in my workplace are afraid - afraid of losing their jobs, afraid of being humiliated by management, afraid of having to implement illegal actions under duress. There is no longer an independent public service (civil service) in this country.

The government has made an art form of vilification - even public government funded free state schools) schools are under attack for not upholding "values".

People are accused left right and centre of being unaustralian. (shades of unamerican)

this country has been radically transformed in the last 8 years. It has been redefined and is no longer the "relaxed and comfortable"
place it used to be. I used this phrase advisedly, as this was the description by the incoming government of eight years ago of its vision for australia.

instead, we have taken on the qualities of regimes this government regularly attacks.

there is a culture of snooping and dobbing. people can be detained without access to a lawyer. sections of society (the psychiatrically challenged, the homeless) have been abandoned. The government has gone out of its way to give people the right to make racist or prejudiced comments, and has launched a relentless campaign against those people who try and speak up for human rights in any way.

i feel neither relaxed nor comfortable.

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: GUEST,Santa
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 07:13 AM

But we do get to wear such lovely uniforms!

Subject: RE: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 06:59 AM

Sensible move, freda.

I don't think double posting is a good idea generally. But here's a post I made in the thread that got de-railed that suggests reasons why the term "fascist" doesn't help in this context:

One of the problem with using the term "fascist" is that it lets people off the hook. They look at what's being attacked, and find that in some respect it doesn't really match the term, and move on to the view that in that case it means things are really OK.

"Fascism" is a particular deformation of society in particular times and places. This has some aspects which are also increasingly characteristic of some of the societies we are living in, and we should be very worried about that. But using the word loosely actually makes it easier for many people to avoid those worries, because they can look at other aspects where there are real differences.

And what it also misses is that there are some very threatening aspects of our societies which weren't available under Fascism in its various forms. Technology means that it is now possible for the authorities to have far more knowledge of and control of us in our daily lives than would ever have been possible in Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy.

It is now actually possible for our rulers to exercise total control over us, one by one, as and when they choose. That has never been possible before, not even in slave societies. The all-embracing nature of this control means that it can be exercised without any need to use the heavy-handed methods that are associated with "fascism" - and if we think about it, that potentially makes it even more frightening.

Subject: BS: Are we still having fun as Fascists Yet
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Jan 04 - 06:45 AM

as the original thread got off track, I'm re- posting this article from Barry Finn

freda

Subject: BS: Are We having fun as Fascists Yet
From: Barry Finn - PM
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 09:22 PM

Thought this might be of interest to some, maybe/maybe not. Scary none the less. How many of the 14 characteristics listed below could we identify with today here in the US?

Copied from http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm Could someone add a blue clicky here, thanks.

Barry


"Fascism Anyone?"

Laurence W. Britt


The following article is from Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 23, Number 2.


Free Inquiry readers may pause to read the "Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles" on the inside cover of the magazine. To a secular humanist, these principles seem so logical, so right, so crucial. Yet, there is one archetypal political philosophy that is anathema to almost all of these principles. It is fascism. And fascism's principles are wafting in the air today, surreptitiously masquerading as something else, challenging everything we stand for. The cliché that people and nations learn from history is not only overused, but also overestimated; often we fail to learn from history, or draw the wrong conclusions. Sadly, historical amnesia is the norm.


We are two-and-a-half generations removed from the horrors of Nazi Germany, although constant reminders jog the consciousness. German and Italian fascism form the historical models that define this twisted political worldview. Although they no longer exist, this worldview and the characteristics of these models have been imitated by protofascist1 regimes at various times in the twentieth century. Both the original German and Italian models and the later protofascist regimes show remarkably similar characteristics. Although many scholars question any direct connection among these regimes, few can dispute their visual similarities.


Beyond the visual, even a cursory study of these fascist and protofascist regimes reveals the absolutely striking convergence of their modus operandi. This, of course, is not a revelation to the informed political observer, but it is sometimes useful in the interests of perspective to restate obvious facts and in so doing shed needed light on current circumstances.


For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco's Spain, Salazar's Portugal, Papadopoulos's Greece, Pinochet's Chile, and Suharto's Indonesia. To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities, cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all followed the fascist or protofascist model in obtaining, expanding, and maintaining power. Further, all these regimes have been overthrown, so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and abuses is possible.


Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level of similarity.


1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.


2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.


3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people's attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite "spontaneous" acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and "terrorists." Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.


4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.


5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.


6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes' excesses.


7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting "national security," and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.


8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite's behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the "godless." A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.


9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of "have-not" citizens.


10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.


11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.


12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. "Normal" and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or "traitors" was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.


13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.


14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.


Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.


Note


1. Defined as a "political movement or regime tending toward or imitating Fascism"—Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.



Laurence Britt's novel, June, 2004, depicts a future America dominated by right-wing extremists.


Barry